In my opinion this game should focus on melee combat

[Avant-Garde 229]

Hey guys, well I believe this would help greatly to reduce the deathmatch factor of this game if it shift its focus to melee combat then ranged. Firearms impose little threat to the one wielding it against its victim, even more if said victim is unnarmed. The risk in ranged combat is way to low. Now if firearms become rare as fuck and the great majority of survivals start using melee weapons, the risk in killing someone is a lot bigger, one single hit you take can make your arm broken, or make you bleed etc and no longer simply having the drop on someone means you can easily kill the person.

 

But to make this happen, we would need a more robust melee mechanics, adding parry/block, making the windup/release/recovery and range of each weapon something much more important and as consequence, melee fights will no longer be a straferun spamfest and will actually requires some strategy and skill, adding depth to the game and making melee fights something fun. I mean, the way I see it, this will only bring good things to the gameplay of DayZ AND will make it different from all the other survival games out there.

 

I really don't know how viable this is due server/internet mumbojumbo, but imo would do a lot of good to this game. So, a good and complex melee system is a must imo, because is something that will change a lot how things play.

 

What you think?

Edited January 23, 2015 by Avant-Garde

[leviski 2152]

we used to have a block mechanic but they took that away, belive it or not you can still block but it is very hard, if your weapon is in the way of their swing they will hit your weapon instead of you.

 

 

what needs to be fixed first is the TERRIBLE GOD AWFULE GARBAGE desyncy Cqc that unfols as you run in circles trying to hit each other.

 

I dont know how many times someone with fists beat me when I had a fire axe simply because on their screen I was standing still while on my screen they were micro-suttering all over the place.

[pillock 850]

I agree.

 

I think 3 things need to happen to make melee somewhat believable:

 

1) reduce running speed to a sane level;

2) implement some sort of momentum for movement, affected by weight, so you can't change direction so quickly;

3) more melee combat moves, such as a block/parry move, a jab/stab attack, and a dodge/duck/avoid action.

 

It doesn't need to go into the level of detail of some of the specialist medieval combat games out there, however.

[Avant-Garde 229]

we used to have a block mechanic but they took that away, belive it or not you can still block but it is very hard, if your weapon is in the way of their swing they will hit your weapon instead of you.

 

 

what needs to be fixed first is the TERRIBLE GOD AWFULE GARBAGE desyncy Cqc that unfols as you run in circles trying to hit each other.

 

I dont know how many times someone with fists beat me when I had a fire axe simply because on their screen I was standing still while on my screen they were micro-suttering all over the place.

Wow that would be awesome too, like clashing you say? Seriously, this would be great

 

I agree.

 

I think 3 things need to happen to make melee somewhat believable:

 

1) reduce running speed to a sane level;

2) implement some sort of momentum for movement, affected by weight, so you can't change direction so quickly;

3) more melee combat moves, such as a block/parry move, a jab/stab attack, and a dodge/duck/avoid action.

 

It doesn't need to go into the level of detail of some of the specialist medieval combat games out there, however.

The number 2 Chivalry solved by adding sort of a negative acceleration of the mouse when you are in the release phase of an attack, so you can't drag your attack in one direction and completely change it mid release, or make a slash and turn your mouse like you are a fucking helicopter. This helps aiming a bit too, since you use the animations as reference and the camera kinda gets heavier. This means that the more smooth your mouse moviment is, the better you can control your attacks.

 

To add the complexity of a medieval combat game there would need SO MUCH more things man, parry/block and windup/release/recovery are pretty basics to make the thing flow. Adding feinting for example, brings in a whole new level of complexity to it.

[Damnyourdeadman 1045]

I agree with the melee direction focus but before anything,first we need to find ways to reduce the amount of weapons.

I remember making a suggestion on a realistic way of enhancing weapon rarity.

Basically what i had in mind was to divide firearms in 2 or more different parts(attachments aside).

The majority of the firearms would spawn in one part,or have one of the parts ruined.

The most common way to have a functioning firearm would be to scavenge both working parts.

A mechanic like this would turn people's attention to melee,because it would be very challenging having a functioning firearm.

Along with an advanced melee system,i think we could create a rewarding gameplay experience. :D

Edited January 23, 2015 by Damnyourdeadman

[Whyherro123 2283]

You do realize that human beings invented melee weapons with reach (spears) and eventually ranged weapons (javelins, slings, and eventually the bow) specifically so they didn't have to get up close and personal, right? Melee combat is 1) scary 2) hard and 3) a good way to get injured, even if you win. Very rarely does an animal (and this includes people) get "one-hit-killed"; they often fight back, even after getting dealt a mortal wound.

 

Don't get me wrong, I've wanted more focus on melee combat for a while now, as it would add some verisimilitude to the game. But there shouldn't be a focus on it. It should just be yet another option for the survivor.

 

Look at firearms. With the proper ammunition, you can (obviously) shoot a player or infected. However, most "military" firearms allow for the mounting of a bayonet, which would allow for the user to stab and slash the enemy in close quarters. This would be useful when out of ammunition (or want to conserve ammunition), want to be "stealthy" (stabbing/slashing someone should make them scream, though), or get surprised. Weapons without a bayonet mount could make an "Improvised Bayonet" with some duct tape and a knife, but it would get damaged over time and be less "effective".

 

Of course, the option to strike an enemy with the "buttstock" of a rifle or shotgun should always be there, bayonet or not. That way, you don't get absolutely fucked, like you currently do, when someone gets inside your longarm reach. 

 

Parrying is when you redirect the force of a blow (blocking is when you absorb it, and never really done in real life. Shields were for parrying blows, not blocking), and could be implemented thusly: when an enemy attacks with a melee weapon, they attack in a specific "direction", directed by the movement of the mouse when implementing the attack (Up could be a buttstroke, left/right could be slashes with a bayonet, down could be a thrust., etc etc etc). Each "attack action" would have differing ranges and be telegraphed differently (thrusts would have the greatest range, but be telegraphed the most, etc).

 

In order to parry a blow, you need to hold a "parry key"  at the right moment, when the blow would impact, as well as indicating the attack direction, or the blow would just slide past the attempt and hit you.

 

As for your "getting the drop on someone" comment, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. They are called "ambushes", and actually require skill and tactics. Not my fault if you don't pay enough attention.

 

Read my first post in this thread (http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/218567-baseball-bat-needs-a-buff/) for my ideas about differences in melee weapons

[Avant-Garde 229]

As for your "getting the drop on someone" comment, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. They are called "ambushes", and actually require skill and tactics. Not my fault if you don't pay enough attention.

 

Read my first post in this thread (http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/218567-baseball-bat-needs-a-buff/) for my ideas about differences in melee weapons

I believe you missed my point sir, that is that firearms offers little risk to its wielder and make killing easier, and every survival game out there is more of a PvP fest then survival itself (DayZ included) so, to help the survival elements, I believe firearms should be really fucking rare so PvP gets less intense, due the fact that there is way more risk in starting a melee fight even against a unnarmed person then shooting someone.

 

BUT, to make melee combat viable and fun, they would need to add and polish some elements. I take Chivalry as a reference because the base of the melee system in DayZ comes from that game, that is the Tracer system. So, imo, DayZ should have more elements of that melee mechanic and aside from server and lag things, I don't think there would be so much trouble to add said features, because the very basics of that mechanic are already in. Also for directional attacks and parry, I believe that lmb, rmb, scroll up and down, mouse button 4 and 5 are easier to implement and more intuitive, but idk what you said also sounded nice.

 

On a side note, anyone with a boomstick and half a brain can set up a ambush. Its easy to ambush someone with a boomstick, even more in this game. Now try to ambush someone with melee, you will think 2, 3 times if it is really worthy. Makes killing someone even more banal.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Avant-Garde

[Whyherro123 2283]

I believe you missed my point sir, that is that firearms offers little risk to its wielder and make killing easier, and every survival game out there is more of a PvP fest then survival itself (DayZ included) so, to help the survival elements, I believe firearms should be really fucking rare so PvP gets less intense, due the fact that there is way more risk in starting a melee fight even against a unnarmed person then shooting someone.

 

BUT, to make melee combat viable and fun, they would need to add and polish some elements. I take Chivalry as a reference because the base of the melee system in DayZ comes from that game, that is the Tracer system. So, imo, DayZ should have more elements of that melee mechanic and aside from server and lag things, I don't think there would be so much trouble to add said features, because the very basics of that mechanic are already in. Also for directional attacks and parry, I believe that lmb, rmb, scroll up and down, mouse button 4 and 5 are easier to implement and more intuitive, but idk what you said also sounded nice.

 

On a side note, anyone with a boomstick and half a brain can set up a ambush. Its easy to ambush someone with a boomstick, even more in this game. Now try to ambush someone with melee, you will think 2, 3 times if it is really worthy.

There were 10 MILLION AKM assault rifles produced officially, 15 MILLION SKS carbines produced officially, and close to 40 MILLION different Mosin-Nagant variants produced officially. These numbers not including the "basement knock-offs" of the above that are produced worldwide. The only reason there would be a shortage of firearms is if they were artificially "balanced", which is a concept I find, to be blunt, quite stupid.

 

So, I have no problem with there being a plethora of firearms available (realistic, after all). To lessen the probability of them being used in combat, lessen the spawn rate of ammunition. That is realistic, considering how everyone right now effectively "prays n sprays" due to the overabundance of ammunition, so whatever stock of ammunition there is is getting used up, with no way to make new rounds. If you have 3 rounds for that Mosin, chances are you aren't going to waste them on that freshspawn/infected, and are going to bayonet/buttstroke them instead.

 

As for your comments on firearms and ambushes: Yeah, and? I've ambushed fully-kitted-out players drinking from wells before with just an axe. Tactics and skill, my friend. Firearms make ambushes easier, they don't make them trivial.

 

As for "survival games being a "PvP-fest", I attribute that in Day Z to being less than 1/3 of the way finished, with little to no actual survival mechanics implemented as of yet. Same thing with H1Z1. There is nothing else to do as of yet, with an overabundance of ammunition (not firearms. The rate of firearm spawns are fine, but my character has 200+ SKS rounds after visiting 2 military locations. Not OK). This is one of the major reasons PvP dominates Day Z as of late.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Whyherro123

[Beizs 186]

Melee combat needs to be improved. A lot. But ranged combat should be the main focus.

 

Why, you ask?

 

When the game is complete, the aim is to have zombies be the main threat. There's going to be hordes, etc. This makes close quarters combat obsolete. Run into a horde of zombies and, no matter how good you are at using your weapon of choice, you're going to die. Guns will be the only usable weapon - and that's what guns are going to be used for primarily. That's how they're going to increase players working together and decrease PvP. By making it so that you either co operate at least some of the time, or you die.

 

Don't get me wrong. Player interaction and fighting is and always will be a massive part of DayZ. But Zombies are supposed to be, too.

 

As for people claiming that guns or even ammunition should be rare, how does that reflect reality? At all? Guns aren't rare. Even military grade ones are common. The fact that Chernarus had a heavy military presence only amplifies this, but even here in the UK, where guns are virtually taboo, I know a fair few places I could get a gun in an apocalypse, entirely hypothetically, of course - I'm not much of a prepper (granted, many of these involve stealing them from people I know and dislike, but yeah - even here, they're not all that rare). It makes 0 sense for guns or ammunition to be rare. I also take issue with the rarity of clothing, backpacks, working vehicles and a lot more, but maybe that's just me. In the aftermath of civilization, with a massively reduced population, there's plenty of everything to go around. I don't believe that DayZ can focus on hardcore survivalism and be realistic as well as difficult. Its focus has to be player interaction and zombies if it wants to actually be realistic (though they've gone for 'authenticity', which I'm fine with).

Edited January 23, 2015 by Beizs

[Damnyourdeadman 1045]

Melee combat needs to be improved. A lot. But ranged combat should be the main focus.

 

Why, you ask?

 

When the game is complete, the aim is to have zombies be the main threat. There's going to be hordes, etc. This makes close quarters combat obsolete. Run into a horde of zombies and, no matter how good you are at using your weapon of choice, you're going to die. Guns will be the only usable weapon - and that's what guns are going to be used for primarily. That's how they're going to increase players working together and decrease PvP. By making it so that you either co operate at least some of the time, or you die.

 

Don't get me wrong. Player interaction and fighting is and always will be a massive part of DayZ. But Zombies are supposed to be, too.

 

On the contrary,the zombie threat will mean a reduction in firearm usage.

A gun shot should turn the whole city's infected population on your location.

 

This is a good opportunity to promote stealth gameplay and turn bows into an irreplaceable weapon in our inventories.

[Beizs 186]

On the contrary,the zombie threat will mean a reduction in firearm usage.

A gun shot should turn the whole city's infected population on your location.

 

This is a good opportunity to promote stealth gameplay and turn bows into an irreplaceable weapon in our inventories.

 

If you're dealing with only a couple of zombies, sure, you'd be an absolute idiot to not employ stealth. If you can avoid a horde, again, you'd be an idiot not to. But if there's never a time where you have to dig your heels in and fight off a large group of zombies, the game isn't doing it right - and if you do come in to that situation, you're going to need your guns.

 

But that still cuts down on the amount of PvP. As you said, firing your gun could draw a huge number of zombies to you. You're not going to risk that just so you can have some lulz, or even to take that guys M4. It's no use to you dead.

[Bororm 1156]

Melee could use some love but I don't agree that it poses little threat against fire arms right now.  Depending on the gun I have, there's times where I'll just straight up run from melee.  Trying to hit a point blank target with any of the low capacity/low rate of fire guns is pretty hard, and all it takes is two axe hits to die.

 

I had a fight against an armed guy and a guy with a stun baton not too long ago.  I had a magnum.  I killed the armed guy first and had time to reload, but his buddy came running around a corner and knocked me out in a single stun baton hit.

 

Of course the effectiveness is currently in large part due to desync and ridiculous run speeds, both of which will hopefully be reduced later on.  At which point melee will probably take an inadvertent nerf.  However, as long as 1-2 hit kills/knockouts exist with it, I think it will always be viable.

[Damnyourdeadman 1045]

If you're dealing with only a couple of zombies, sure, you'd be an absolute idiot to not employ stealth. If you can avoid a horde, again, you'd be an idiot not to. But if there's never a time where you have to dig your heels in and fight off a large group of zombies, the game isn't doing it right - and if you do come in to that situation, you're going to need your guns.

 

But that still cuts down on the amount of PvP. As you said, firing your gun could draw a huge number of zombies to you. You're not going to risk that just so you can have some lulz, or even to take that guys M4. It's no use to you dead.

 

I agree,when all else fails,having a gun could be a life saver.

[Avant-Garde 229]

There were 10 MILLION AKM assault rifles produced officially, 15 MILLION SKS carbines produced officially, and close to 40 MILLION different Mosin-Nagant variants produced officially. These numbers not including the "basement knock-offs" of the above that are produced worldwide. The only reason there would be a shortage of firearms is if they were artificially "balanced", which is a concept I find, to be blunt, quite stupid.

 

So, I have no problem with there being a plethora of firearms available (realistic, after all). To lessen the probability of them being used in combat, lessen the spawn rate of ammunition. That is realistic, considering how everyone right now effectively "prays n sprays" due to the overabundance of ammunition, so whatever stock of ammunition there is is getting used up, with no way to make new rounds. If you have 3 rounds for that Mosin, chances are you aren't going to waste them on that freshspawn/infected, and are going to bayonet/buttstroke them instead.

 

As for your comments on firearms and ambushes: Yeah, and? I've ambushed fully-kitted-out players drinking from wells before with just an axe. Tactics and skill, my friend. Firearms make ambushes easier, they don't make them trivial.

 

As for "survival games being a "PvP-fest", I attribute that in Day Z to being less than 1/3 of the way finished, with little to no actual survival mechanics implemented as of yet. Same thing with H1Z1. There is nothing else to do as of yet, with an overabundance of ammunition (not firearms. The rate of firearm spawns are fine, but my character has 200+ SKS rounds after visiting 2 military locations. Not OK). This is one of the major reasons PvP dominates Day Z as of late.

Your first argument is based on reality, and this is a game and imo it should be thought like that. I agree with the low ammo idea, haven't thought about that in my first post and I actually think its a better option then making firearms all rare and shit, because as you said, you can also use them as melee weapons whitch is very nice imo.

 

I believe we both agree on what is most important, melee system needs to be more complex because the use of firearms will be lower in the future, either by less weapons or by less ammo.

 

Also I was reading again your first post and you said this "Melee combat is 1) scary 2) hard and 3) a good way to get injured, even if you win.", and I think these are three very solid arguments on why melee should be improved. A good melee makes the game more brutal, and now it is kind of a imersion killer if you think about it. Run arround your opponent and spam is what mostly happens, also lags and descincs but getting rid of these will not magicaly make melee more deep and imersive

Melee combat needs to be improved. A lot. But ranged combat should be the main focus.

 

Why, you ask?

 

When the game is complete, the aim is to have zombies be the main threat. There's going to be hordes, etc. This makes close quarters combat obsolete. Run into a horde of zombies and, no matter how good you are at using your weapon of choice, you're going to die. Guns will be the only usable weapon - and that's what guns are going to be used for primarily. That's how they're going to increase players working together and decrease PvP. By making it so that you either co operate at least some of the time, or you die.

 

Don't get me wrong. Player interaction and fighting is and always will be a massive part of DayZ. But Zombies are supposed to be, too.

 

As for people claiming that guns or even ammunition should be rare, how does that reflect reality? At all? Guns aren't rare. Even military grade ones are common. The fact that Chernarus had a heavy military presence only amplifies this, but even here in the UK, where guns are virtually taboo, I know a fair few places I could get a gun in an apocalypse, entirely hypothetically, of course - I'm not much of a prepper (granted, many of these involve stealing them from people I know and dislike, but yeah - even here, they're not all that rare). It makes 0 sense for guns or ammunition to be rare. I also take issue with the rarity of clothing, backpacks, working vehicles and a lot more, but maybe that's just me. In the aftermath of civilization, with a massively reduced population, there's plenty of everything to go around. I don't believe that DayZ can focus on hardcore survivalism and be realistic as well as difficult. Its focus has to be player interaction and zombies if it wants to actually be realistic (though they've gone for 'authenticity', which I'm fine with).

You see, as you said, there are few moments where you really need a firearm, and usually are moments where you screwed up and has a great chance to die. Most of the time it wont be this situation, will be stealth play and all that I believe. So thats why I say they should focus on melee, because it will play a huge role in this game. Thats the reason why I think they shoud add as much as possible to melee combat, to make it a enjoyable experience.

 

It has the basics of something very cool that imo is worth to invest

Edited January 23, 2015 by Avant-Garde

[[Outcasts]Massacre 121]

No. just no. This is DayZ not DayZ Knights.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Massacre

[Rags! 1966]

Using melee weapons should be the highly risky, but highly rewarding as well. Hitting somebody in the ballistic helmeted head with a baseball bat will still really hurt them. A player with a gun should still be very wary of ambushes and sneaky players. 

 

Do this by...

 

1) Making ammunition far less common than it is currently, making players opt for melee combat in certain scenarios for the sake of conserving ammunition

2) Give player characters momentum and weight

3) Have bladed weapons inflict bleeding with reliability, and have blunt weapons have a higher rate of fracturing. 

4) Have the lengths of melee weapons determine their arc of swing, and inhibit using such weapons in small spaces

[DeatHTaX 1217]

No. just no. This is DayZ not DayZ Knights.

 

OP is not trying to make it DayZ Knights. Try being a BIT more engaged in the discussion, and you'll see that OP is not trying to do that at all

 

 

In a "zombie" survival game like DayZ, solid melee mechanics are imperative, especially with the soon-to-be rarity of guns/ammo and the dangers of using them in future builds.

 

I mean come on, watch EVERY ZOMBIE MOVIE EVER. more than half of the action is melee combat. What I think OP is trying to say is that we need a solid melee system that reflects more of an experience than simply circle strafing a zombie.

 

The ability to swing a weapon, maybe jab with it, block with it, etc are all excellent ideas.

 

And heck, if the melee system in the game were MORE like the medieval games out there, I think it would be a step in the right direction, anyway, considering how terrible it is at the moment.

[Bororm 1156]

Not to be a downer but saying it should be more like the medieval games out there doesn't really do anything.  The devs have stated from the start that they'd like that too, but there's a huge difference between these kinda games.  Lag already plays a huge role in games like chivalry/mount and blade/war of the roses, to the point of giving a huge advantage to those with better ping.  DayZ's server architecture is incredibly more complex than any of these games and those problems will just be compounded.

 

The result being, if you simply toss in a system with blocks and parries and all that sorta shit into DayZ as it stands it would be a total mess and miserable.  You think it's bad now, making it more complex isn't going to help.  Not yet any ways.

[tofur 16]

I agree with the melee direction focus but before anything,first we need to find ways to reduce the amount of weapons.

I remember making a suggestion on a realistic way of enhancing weapon rarity.

Basically what i had in mind was to divide firearms in 2 or more different parts(attachments aside).

The majority of the firearms would spawn in one part,or have one of the parts ruined.

The most common way to have a functioning firearm would be to scavenge both working parts.

A mechanic like this would turn people's attention to melee,because it would be very challenging having a functioning firearm.

Along with an advanced melee system,i think we could create a rewarding gameplay experience. :D

 

I think making guns hard to get would only serve to enlarge the gap between clans/large groups and the individual lone wolfs (which is already big since most casual individual players don't have suppressed M4's and a thousand rounds w/ ghillie suit and so on).  The big groups have a bunch of people all looting and sharing their stuff.  The game would suck at that point, you'd have big groups running around with guns while the casual lone wolf player gets slaughtered without even being able to fight back with semi-equal force.  If there are going to be guns in dayz they have to be readily available to all.

Edited January 23, 2015 by tofur

[therandomredstone 432]

If you're dealing with only a couple of zombies, sure, you'd be an absolute idiot to not employ stealth. If you can avoid a horde, again, you'd be an idiot not to. But if there's never a time where you have to dig your heels in and fight off a large group of zombies, the game isn't doing it right - and if you do come in to that situation, you're going to need your guns.

 

But that still cuts down on the amount of PvP. As you said, firing your gun could draw a huge number of zombies to you. You're not going to risk that just so you can have some lulz, or even to take that guys M4. It's no use to you dead.

 

Hey guys, well I believe this would help greatly to reduce the deathmatch factor of this game if it shift its focus to melee combat then ranged. Firearms impose little threat to the one wielding it against its victim, even more if said victim is unnarmed. The risk in ranged combat is way to low. Now if firearms become rare as fuck and the great majority of survivals start using melee weapons, the risk in killing someone is a lot bigger, one single hit you take can make your arm broken, or make you bleed etc and no longer simply having the drop on someone means you can easily kill the person.

 

But to make this happen, we would need a more robust melee mechanics, adding parry/block, making the windup/release/recovery and range of each weapon something much more important and as consequence, melee fights will no longer be a straferun spamfest and will actually requires some strategy and skill, adding depth to the game and making melee fights something fun. I mean, the way I see it, this will only bring good things to the gameplay of DayZ AND will make it different from all the other survival games out there.

 

I really don't know how viable this is due server/internet mumbojumbo, but imo would do a lot of good to this game. So, a good and complex melee system is a must imo, because is something that will change a lot how things play.

 

What you think?

Haha, what most people don't understand about this game is that when its done it will be one of the best games of the century (survival game at the least) because before it is released, everything you could practically imagine will be in the game. First of all when the game is out, 80% of banditry will be done with melee weapons because guns will be so uncommon to come across. Melee along with guns and literally every single other mechanics in this game will be improved over time. So just sit back, play the game, and let time pass. Before you know it this game will have it's trailers on ESPN and will be on the shelves of every game store in the country(s) (world). (that is if it is not sold out).

[TheRicktator44 6]

...I would just love to not fear for my life that some sort of horrible bug or something is going to happen where a zombie one hit bitch slaps me into my grave haha feeling like the character was a little more competent in fighting for its life would be nice.

 

But in all seriousness it's early so I'm sure my fears will be addressed lol, and those were some great ideas I'm glad I read the post. Once things as far as connection are taken care of, because that's the root problem here, no melee system is the right answer till all the bugginess is taken care of lol. I would like to see some slightly realistic applications of force and momentum if you were to use a blunt object, because then you could physically deflect a zombie away, or my favorite idea, let us do some leg breaking on the zombies, that seems fair right? Sure they don't feel pain but it's much easier to flee a one legged zombie I would imagine.

 

I think it would just be nice to finally see the other weapons actually be remotely useful, instead of fire axe FTW lol

[tofur 16]

Haha, what most people don't understand about this game is that when its done it will be one of the best games of the century (survival game at the least) because before it is released, everything you could practically imagine will be in the game. First of all when the game is out, 80% of banditry will be done with melee weapons because guns will be so uncommon to come across. Melee along with guns and literally every single other mechanics in this game will be improved over time. So just sit back, play the game, and let time pass. Before you know it this game will have it's trailers on ESPN and will be on the shelves of every game store in the country(s) (world). (that is if it is not sold out).

It's got an extremely long way to go if it wants to be one of the best games of the century.  Like, an impossibly long way.  

[Beizs 186]

Haha, what most people don't understand about this game is that when its done it will be one of the best games of the century (survival game at the least) because before it is released, everything you could practically imagine will be in the game. First of all when the game is out, 80% of banditry will be done with melee weapons because guns will be so uncommon to come across. Melee along with guns and literally every single other mechanics in this game will be improved over time. So just sit back, play the game, and let time pass. Before you know it this game will have it's trailers on ESPN and will be on the shelves of every game store in the country(s) (world). (that is if it is not sold out).

 

I'm not shitting on the game at all. I'm incredibly optimistic about it and, frankly, am happy enough with the game how it is already (though, obviously, I want it to be finished). Guns shouldn't be rare though. It makes 0 logical sense in any location, let alone a post-soviet, heavily militarized area. Guns and ammo should be incredibly common. There should just be consequences for using them (as in, you draw in zombie hordes).

 

Other than that, I agree with you, though I wouldn't expect it to be sold out on release as its going to have been out for probably 3+ years by then.

[PhillyT 554]

No.

[Avant-Garde 229]

Not to be a downer but saying it should be more like the medieval games out there doesn't really do anything.  The devs have stated from the start that they'd like that too, but there's a huge difference between these kinda games.  Lag already plays a huge role in games like chivalry/mount and blade/war of the roses, to the point of giving a huge advantage to those with better ping.  DayZ's server architecture is incredibly more complex than any of these games and those problems will just be compounded.

 

The result being, if you simply toss in a system with blocks and parries and all that sorta shit into DayZ as it stands it would be a total mess and miserable.  You think it's bad now, making it more complex isn't going to help.  Not yet any ways.

 Would be nice to have a dev talking about the limits of this engine/game about melee, so we can have a base to discuss realisticaly what would be a better melee system for dayz

 

No.

You add a lot to the whole discussion posting like this man, thanks for the contribution!

 

OP is not trying to make it DayZ Knights. Try being a BIT more engaged in the discussion, and you'll see that OP is not trying to do that at all

 

 

In a "zombie" survival game like DayZ, solid melee mechanics are imperative, especially with the soon-to-be rarity of guns/ammo and the dangers of using them in future builds.

 

I mean come on, watch EVERY ZOMBIE MOVIE EVER. more than half of the action is melee combat. What I think OP is trying to say is that we need a solid melee system that reflects more of an experience than simply circle strafing a zombie.

 

The ability to swing a weapon, maybe jab with it, block with it, etc are all excellent ideas.

 

And heck, if the melee system in the game were MORE like the medieval games out there, I think it would be a step in the right direction, anyway, considering how terrible it is at the moment.

Thanks man, english is not my first language so I believe my posts can be a pain in the ass to read or I might not express myself the way I really wanted to. You said it in a much better way, thats exacly what I mean

Edited January 24, 2015 by Avant-Garde